N39430-20-R-2201.pdf

INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC) FOR PHYSICAL

SECURITY/ACCESS CONTROL (PS/AC).

This acquisition is 100% small business set-aside w ith a reserve for w omen ow ned small business.

NAICS: 237990 Size Standard: $39.5 Million Maximum dollar amount for all contracts combined is $99,000,000.

Estimated Task Order range is $2,000 to $6,000,000 Minimum Guarantee is $10,000 or aw ard of the seed task.

Small Business Offerors must demonstrate a minimum aggregate bonding capacity of $10 million to allow for the management of multiple, concurrent projects.

Construction Contract – Net 14 days for payment (FAR 52.232-27)

MELISSA A. IZARELLI (805) 982-5605

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

19-Dec-2019

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

X

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________3 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________17 Feb 2020 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

NAVFAC EXWC

CODE ACQ / NAVAL BASE VENTURA COUNTY

1100 23RD AVE BLDG 1100

PORT HUENEME CA 93043-4301

N39430

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

04:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

N3943020R2201 85

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

N3943020R2201

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

SECTION 00 11 19

SECTION 00 11 19

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

1. Introduction This is a solicitation for an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC). This procurement uses the two-phase design-build selection procedures and consists of one solicitation covering both phases with the intent to award Three to Five MACCs. See Section 00 72 00 for the general scope of the contract.

2. Set-Aside This contract is a 100% Small Business set-aside with a reserve for one Women Owned Small Business.

3. NAICS Code:

237990 Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction. Size Standard: $39.5M

4. Inquiries Inquiries regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be submitted electronically to the contract specialist, Melissa Izarelli at melissa.izarelli@navy.mil utilizing the Request For Information (RFI) form (Attachment E).

RFI’s regarding the Phase I factors shall be submitted no later than 17 January 2020. RFI’s submitted after this date may not be answered. RFI’s regarding Phase II and the seed task will not be answered during the RFI submission deadline for Phase I. The submission deadline for RFI’s regarding phase II and the seed task will be provided to the Offeror’s selected to advance to Phase II. NAVFAC EXWC will provide responses to RFI via amendment, which will be posted on Beta.Sam Contract Opportunities. Offerors submitting questions will not be identified, and questions may be redacted if the name of the offeror’s firm is embedded in the RFI. Multiple questions may be included on the RFI Form.

5. Proposal Submittal Requirements Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. The format for the proposal is as follows:

5.1 Phase One:

5.1.1 Cover Letter. The cover letter shall include—

5.1.1.1 The solicitation number;

5.1.1.2 The name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and e-mail addresses of the Offeror;

5.1.1.3 The DUNS Number and CAGE Code of the Offeror;

5.1.1.4 A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation;

5.1.1.5 Names, titles, and phone and email addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation and;

5.1.1.6 Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority.

5.1.1.7 Identification of any potential organizational conflicts of interest, or if none, so state.

5.1.2 Signed SF 1442 with blocks 14 though 20c completed

5.1.3 Tab 1 - Factor 1, Technical Approach (Attachment “A,” Organizational Chart, summary resumes for certain key personnel, and Signed Copies of Agreements or Letters of Commitment for Each Member of the Offeror’s Team)

5.1.4 Tab 2 - Factor 2, Experience (Attachment “B”)

5.1.5 Tab 3 - Factor 3, Past Performance (CPARS/CCASS/ACASS evaluations or PPQ – Attachment “C”;

Offeror’s Team Consent Form – Attachment “D”; and address any adverse past performance, if applicable).

5.1.6 Responsibility Determination: A summary responsibility determination will be made prior to determining which offerors will be requested to submit Phase Two proposals. The following items are required to be submitted:

5.1.6.1 Surety Form: Offeror shall submit a completed form in Attachment “G”. The form shall be completed by the firm’s surety(ies). Note that the aggregate bonding capacity must be $10,000,000 or more.

5.1.6.2 VETS-4212 Report Submission Confirmation (or Statement of Non-applicability)

5.1.6.3 Section 00 45 00 Representations and Certifications (from section 00 45 00 of the RFP, not from SAM)

5.2 Phase Two: Offerors shall submit Phase II proposals only when notified of being selected to advance to the Phase II evaluation.

5.2.1 Tab 4 - Factor 4, Technical Solution (Seed Task Order) Attachment “H”

5.2.2 Tab 5 - Factor 5, Safety (Attachment “I”)

5.2.3 Tab 6 - Factor 6, Price Attachment “J”. SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) with blocks 14 through 20c completed; Bid Bond (in the amount of 20% for PTO #0001), a completed Attachment “J”

5.2.3.1 Financial Questionnaire: Offeror shall submit a completed form in Attachment “F”. The form shall be completed by the firm’s financial institution(s) and returned to the offeror in a sealed envelope. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9.

5.3 Proposals shall be submitted in three ring binders or bound, with tabs or separators. Page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to. Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5” X 11” paper, unless otherwise stipulated, utilizing both sides of the paper Offerors are requested to submit only the information/exhibits required. Do not submit any additional information such as brochures, or other pre-printed materials.

5.4 A total of one (1) original and three (3) hard copies (4 total) of the Phase I proposal must be received by this office no later than the date and time stated in Block 13 of the SF1442. For phase II proposals, one (1) orignal and three (3) hard copies must be received by the time specified in the Phase II invitation letter or amendment. Offerors should address all evaluation factors and shall submit the proposal to the following address:

Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center Acquisitions, Code ACQ-72 Attention: Melissa Izarelli 1100 23rd Ave, Bldg. 1100 Port Hueneme, CA 93043-4301

5.5 Federal Express and United Parcel Service deliveries are made to the shipping and receiving section of Bldg.

1100. Packages submitted through the U.S. Postal Service are sorted in another location before being distributed to the buildings on the installation. If proposals are hand carried, Offeror’s are advised to contact the contract specialist to coordinate receipt of the proposal at the Pass and ID office located at the Sunkist Gate.

5.6 LATE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. Proposal must be clearly marked on the outside of the package with the solicitation number.

6. Pre-Proposal Conference

6.1 A pre-proposal conference will be held on 08 January 2020, at 8:00 AM local time at 12217 Science Drive, Orlando, Florida 32826 where an overview of this RFP will be provided. Visit details are as follows:

8:00 A.M (EST) Meet at Visitor Center at 12217 Science Drive, Orlando, Florida 32826 9:00 A.M. (EST) Go to Bldg. 1, Second Floor PWO conference for pre-proposal conference 10:00 A.M. (EST) Walk to gate area for site visit survey

Due to the size of the conference room, firms are limited to two attendees per prime contractor (including subcontractors) for the pre-proposal conference and site visit: No exceptions. All visitors will have escorted access unless they have a valid Common Access Card (CAC). All attendees are required to provide the following information by 30 Dec 2019 to ensure adequate processing time for site visit requests. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is not required for the site visit. Photography by contractors is not allowed. Photo requests may be made during the site-walk. Photos will be taken and provided by the Government. No one will be allowed on the base without submitting this information:

Visitor Name:

Company Name:

Prime Contractor Name:

Date(s) of Visit: 08 January 2020 Citizenship:

Reason for Visit: Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit N3943020R2201 Common Access Card (CAC) holder status: Yes/No

6.2 All prospective Offerors are urged to attend this conference. In order to make the conference as productive as possible, Offerors are requested to submit, one week prior to the pre-proposal conference, any questions they may have in writing to the contract specialist. Note: this is not the final deadline for the submission of questions. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the pre-proposal conference.

6.3 Prospective Offerors are advised that the pre-proposal conference will be held solely for the purpose of providing an explanation of the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation.

6.4 Question and answers from the pre-proposal conference will be posted by amendment. All prospective Offerors are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is amended in writing. However, if an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of any such amendment as described in 52.215-1(b) Amendments to Solicitation, shall apply.

6.5 A site visit for the seed task order will occur after the pre-proposal conference. The number of offerors and the identity of offerors selected for Phase II is considered source selection information, therefore the site visit must be held before Phase II proposals are requested.

7. System for Award Management (SAM) Offerors must be registered in the System for Award Management when submitting an offer and must continue to be registered until award, during performance, and through final payment. For more information, visit http://www.sam.gov. Remember to review the NAICS codes listed in your firms profile and ensure that you have listed the NAICS code for this procurement in order to certify your size standard for this procurement.

8. Federal Contractor Program In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 22.1303, any contractor or subcontractor with a contract of $150,000 or more with the Federal Government must take affirmative action to hire and promote qualified targeted veterans which includes, special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, recently separated veterans, and any other veterans who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized. Companies must file an annual VETS-4212 report, which shows the number of targeted veterans in their work force by job category, hiring location, and number of new hires, including targeted veterans hired during the reporting period and the maximum number and minimum number of employees of such contractor during the period covered by the report. Instructions, information and follow-up assistance is provided at VETS-4212 Internet site at https://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm

9. Incurred Expenses The Government is not responsible for any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation.

10. Historical Data The previous PS/AC MACC was competed as a small business set-aside and awarded on 21 May 2013 to three contractors: Alutiiq Pacific, LLC (N39430-13-D-1264); Securityhunter, Inc. (N39430-13-D-1265); and Split Pine Technologies, LLC (N39430-13-D-1266). The previous PS/AC MACC was firm fixed price and included a base year and two option years with a cumulative maximum amount of $99,000,000. The ordering period for the third and final option year ended 20 May 2016. The table below provides historical data for the past three years. The Current Amount includes the value of any modifications that have been awarded.

Contract # Task

Order # Title Current

Amount

N3943013D1264 0001 Minimum guarantee $0.00

N3943013D1264 0002 Newport Gate Automation $1,577,134.00

N3943013D1264 0003 Pensacola Gate Automation and Turnstiles $1,945,107.00

N3943013D1264 0004 NB Point Loma Tech Refresh $245,251.00

N3943013D1264 0005 NB Coronado Tech Refresh $238,486.00

N3943013D1264 0006 NB San Diego Tech Refresh $412,961.00

N3943013D1264 0007 NAS Lemoore Tech Refresh $232,792.00

N3943013D1264 0008 NAS -JBR FT Worth Tech Refresh $328,858.00

N3943013D1264 0009 NAS Kingsville Tech Refresh $550,645.00

N3943013D1264 0010 NWS Seal Beach Tech Refresh $214,148.00

N3943013D1264 0011 NAS Corpus Christi North Back Gate & Delta Gate. $1,315,212.22

N3943013D1264 0012 Gate Automation NAS Point Loma, CA $1,064,328.00

N3943013D1264 0013 NWS Seal Beach Kitts Hwy / PCH Bridge. $906,022.38

N3943013D1264 0014 Gate Automation NAS Fallon, Nevada $939,280.80

N3943013D1264 0015 NS Midsouth Tech Ref $862,435.32

N3943013D1264 0016 NAS Oceana $889,229.00

N3943013D1264 0017 Naval Station Great Lakes Automated Vehicle Gates Low and High Volume with APTs

$4,632,770.63

N3943013D1265 0001 Design, procure, install PS/AC at NAS Lemoore $3,137,026.00

N3943013D1265 0002 Meridian Gate Automation $1,084,845.48

N3943013D1265 0003 CNRNW Gate and Airfield Enclave $6,663,934.92

N3943013D1265 0004 Gate Automation NB Ventura NCBC Port Hueneme Pleasant Valley Gate.

$1,117,791.98

N3943013D1265 0005 Gate Automation NAF EL CentroTask Order. $326,322.12

N3943013D1265 0006 Gate Automation NB San Diego gates 23 32nd & Callaghan Hwy and 43 dry side.

$278,643.25

N3943013D1265 0007 JEB LtCrk-Wallops Isl $2,528,846.40

N3943013D1265 0008 NS Norfolk $2,581,081.13

N3943013D1265 0009 NWS Yorktown $1,001,742.29

N3943013D1266 0001 Minimum guarantee $0.00

N3943013D1266 0002 Kingsbay Gate Automation $1,141,298.69

N3943013D1266 0003 Gulfport Gate Automation $1,934,985.91

N3943013D1266 0004 Mayport Gate Automation $1,213,635.04

N3943013D1266 0005 Low Volume Hybrid Automated Vehicular Gate (LVHAVG) system at five access control points (ACP) within the Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hawaii

$4,897,496.51

SECTION 00 21 16

SECTION 00 21 16

INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

Basis of Award and Evaluation Factors

1. DEFINITIONS

1.1 CONCURRENT TASK ORDERS: Projects with multiple starting and ending points, performed under separate task orders, and/or contracts where the period of performance occurred simultaneously for a substantial (two months or more) period of time.

1.2 DEFICIENCY: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

1.3 DESIGN-BUILD: Refers to combining design and construction in a single contract with one contractor. Design-build projects require design of the project by a licensed professional (i.e. engineer, architect). Projects that only require shop drawing level effort are not design-build projects.

1.4 FIVE-YEAR PERIOD: The prescribed timeframe for this solicitation that refers to the period of time for which projects may be submitted for experience, past performance, or for prior support for small business. The five-year period is calculated by counting back five years from the initial RFP issuance date.

1.5 FULLY DESIGNED PROJECT: Refers to the traditional delivery method where design and construction are sequential and contracted for separately with two contracts and two contractors.

1.6 LEAD DESIGN FIRM: Applies to any outside Lead Design Firm and any in-house Lead Designer(s).

1.7 OFFEROR: Refers to the contractor submitting the proposal as offeror, including joint ventures, whose name appears in Block 14 of Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award).

1.8 PAGE: Refers to one printed side of a piece of paper. (For example, five pieces of paper printed on both sides would result in 10 pages of narrative.)

1.9 PROJECT: A design-build or a fully designed construction activity or task, with a single starting point and a single ending point.

1.10 SELF-PERFORM: Refers to performing work in-house without subcontractors.

1.11 SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS: A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

1.12 STRENGTH: An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal which has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

1.13 WEAKNESS: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

1.14 100% COMPLETE:

1.14.1 For construction projects: The facility is completely constructed and ready for the intended use.

1.14.2 For design projects: 100% plans and specifications signed off by an Architect-Engineer and ready for construction with final cost estimate. Does not include any Post Construction Award Support (PCAS).

2. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS:

2.1 Factor 1 – Technical Approach will be rated using the following adjectival ratings:

Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

2.2 Factor 2 – Experience, Factor 4 – Technical Solution, and Factor 5 – Safety will be rated using the following adjectival ratings:

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Outstanding (O)

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good (G)

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable (A)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (M)

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

2.3 Factor 3 – Past Performance will be evaluated for Relevancy and Performance Confidence using the following adjectival ratings:

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method Adjectival Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Confidence Assessments

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

3. SOLICITATION PROCESS OVERVIEW

3.1. This solicitation will use the Two Phase Design-Build procedures of FAR 36.3.

4. PHASE ONE – SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION FACTORS

4.1 The factors that are to submitted for Phase One are as follows:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance

4.2 The factors that will be evaluated in Phase One remain the same as the factors for submission.

4.3 Factor 1 - Technical Approach:

(a) Solicitation Submission Requirements: The composition and management of the firms proposed as the design-build (DB) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor. The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “1”:

1. Using Attachment “A” (Offeror Team Composition and Management), provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firm(s); and primary design firm(s) (if applicable); and major subcontractors for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). Attachment A shall be limited to two (2) double-sided pages or four (4) single-sided pages.

2. On a separate sheet, include a one (1) page organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities.

3. Provide one (1) summary resume for the Program Manager, at least three (3) but no more than five (5) summary resumes for Project Managers, and one (1) summary resume for the Project Engineer. Limit individual summary resumes to one (1) double sided page or two (2) single sided pages.

4. The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor-protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.) (No page limits).

(b) Basis of Evaluation: The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will include a determination as to whether the offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement includes the necessary members to accomplish the work described in Section 00 72 00 of this RFP, and to be performed under this contract and to perform at geographically dispersed areas; whether the proposed organizational structure meets the requirements of the Part 2 specifications (refer to Attachment H); and whether the key personnel resumes submitted by the Offeror meet the personnel requirements listed in section 00 72 00. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

4.4 Factor 2 - Experience :

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “2”: Use Attachment “B” (Offeror or Designer Experience Project Data Sheet) to submit no more than five

(5) projects performed by the offeror and/or the offeror’s Lead Design Firm, and/or major subcontractors. Submit Project Data Sheets that demonstrate construction and/or design experience on projects that were completed within five (5) years of the issue date of the RFP; that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.

A project is defined as a design-build or a fully designed construction activity or task, with a single starting point and a single ending point. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project. The attached Offeror and/or Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment B) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages). If a worksheet has more than two (2) pages, the information in excess pages will be removed and not be considered by the evaluation board. Any projects submitted in excess of five (5) projects will be removed and not be considered by the evaluation board.

Any project not completed will not be considered.

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP.

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects.

If an offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate how the affiliate will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a letter of commitment from the subcontractor and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract.

(b) Basis of Evaluation: The offeror’s submissions will be evaluated to determine whether the past projects are similar to the work to be performed under this contract. Projects which demonstrate that the offeror has the resources and knowledge needed on this contract will be rated more favorably.

Any project that was completed more than five years before the issuance date of the RFP will not be considered.

Data sheets that fail to provide required and complete information may be rated lower.

Projects where the offeror and the lead design firm have worked together may be rated higher.

Projects where the offeror as the prime and the major subcontractor have worked together may be rated higher.

Projects where the Joint Venture partners have worked together may be rated higher.

Projects performed by the offeror may be rated more relevant than projects performed by the Lead Design Firm and/or performed by major subcontractors.

Data sheets that demonstrate the project was performed concurrently with other data sheets (projects) may be rated higher.

Projects that, in the aggregate, demonstrate experience with the full scope of the RFP (i.e. Automated Vehicle Gates (AVGs), Automated Pedestrian Turnstiles (APTs), Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) Gates, Enclaves, Active Vehice Barriers (AVBs), Electronic Security Systems (ESSs) and Physical Security Information Management (PSIM) Systems) may be rated higher.

4.5 Factor 3 - Past Performance:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “3”. Offerors are required to submit past performance information for the SAME five projects that were submitted for Factor 2, Experience. For each project/contract, there are two submittal requirements: (1) past performance evaluation forms; and (2) a narrative statement.

(1) Past Performance Evaluation Forms. For each project/contract, the offeror must submit a FINAL Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation (legacy ACASS or CCASS evaluations are acceptable) or a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment C). If a final CPARS evaluation is available on the CPARS website for the contract/project, the offeror must submit the CPARS evaluation for the project/contract. If there is not a final CPARS evaluation for the project/contract, a PPQ must be submitted. A PPQ form is included as Attachment C to the solicitation. Offerors must submit the PPQ form to the client for completion. Offerors should take care to ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact on the PPQs. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of the questionnaires. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project/contract before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ which will provide contract/project and client information. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Melissa Izarelli, via email at melissa.izarelli@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. An offeror should not submit a PPQ when a final CPARS evaluation is available. Only one PPQ shall be submitted per project.

The Government will only consider recent past performance. Recent is defined as projects/contracts completed no more than five years from the posting date of this RFP. Projects/contracts which were completed more than five years before the posting of this RFP will not be evaluated.

The Government may utilize any other information available in the past performance evaluation.

(2) Narrative Statement. Offerors must submit a statement for each project/contract submitted that provides an overview of each project/contract and how the project/contract is relevant to the work described in the performance work statement of this solicitation. The statement for each project/contract may not exceed one page.

The statement should be included immediately after the respective CPAR or PPQ.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate each offeror’s past performance using a three-step process. First, the Government will determine whether the project is recent. Second, the Government will evaluate the relevancy of all projects/contracts submitted by the offeror and other information available (Relevancy Assessment). Third, the Government will, considering relevancy and the offeror’s performance on those contracts, assign a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.

(1) Recency Assessment: The Government will evaluate whether the project was completed within the past five years, considering the issue date of the RFP. Projects that are not recent will not be considered further.

(2) Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct a relevancy assessment of each project/contract submitted by the offeror to determine the work performed under those projects/contracts relates to the work described in this solicitation. The Government is not obliged to seek out and consider information other than the information the offeror submits but may at its discretion consider information involving other projects/contracts.

The Government will evaluate the relevancy of projects based on the evaluation scale in the table shown above. The terms “scope”, “magnitude” and “complexity” have broad meaning such that evaluators will consider any feature of a past project/contract which has a predicative effect on performance on the current contract.

The purpose of assessing relevancy is to take into account the predictive value of past effort toward success on this contract. Therefore, work performed under a Government contract may be considered more relevant than work performed under a commercial contract. In addition, past performance as a prime contractor may be more relevant than the past effort performed as a subcontractor.

(3) Overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. Taking into account the Relevancy Assessment (Step 2), and the quality of performance on the past projects/contracts, the Government will assign an overall performance confidence assessment rating for this factor (past performance rating) based on the scale in the table shown above. Offerors for whom past performance information is not available or is so sparse that no rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and, as a result, will receive an “Unknown Confidence” rating for this factor. A favorable record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an “Unknown Confidence” rating.

CPARS and PPQs that have narratives that qualify the ratings provided may be considered more favorably than CPARS and PPQs with no comments or limited comments, even if the ratings are higher.

5. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS FOR PHASE ONE:

5.1 Factor - 1 Technical Approach will be evaluated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. Any firm found Unacceptable for Technical Approach will not be considered further. Offerors that are considered Acceptable for Technical Approach will then be evaluated for Factor 2 – Experience and Factor 3 – Past Performance. For Phase One, Factor -2 Experience and Factor 3 - Past Performance are equal to one another.

6. SELECTION OF OFFERORS FOR PHASE TWO:

6.1 The Government does not intend to enter into discussions for Phase One proposals. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal.

6.2 Phase One evaluation will result in a determination of the most highly qualified Offerors. The Government will evaluate proposals and select approximately five (5) offerors to submit a Phase Two proposal. The maximum number of Offerors that will be selected to submit a Phase Two proposal is five (5), unless the contracting officer determines that a number greater than five (5) is in the Government’s interest and is consistent with the purposes and objectives of two-phase design-build contracting. Offerors are advised that those Offerors who are selected to proceed to Phase Two are not guaranteed receipt of a contract award.

7. PHASE TWO – SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION FACTORS

7.1 The factors that are to be submitted for Phase Two are as follows:

Factor 4 – Technical Solution Factor 5 – Safety Factor 6 – Price

7.2 The factors that will be evaluated in Phase Two are as follows:

Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Technical Solution Factor 5 – Safety Factor 6 – Price

Factor 2 - Experience and Factor 3 – Past Performance are not submission requirements for Phase Two, however, they will be evaluated in Phase Two as part of the Phase Two evaluation factors.

7.3 Factor 4 – Technical Solution:

For evaluation of Factor 4 – Technical Solution, a seed task order is included in this solicitation as Attachment “H”. The non-price factors (Technical Approach and Schedule) are elements of this factor will be combined to form the basis of this factor.

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “4”

1. Technical Approach: The offeror shall submit a technical proposal for the seed task. The technical proposal shall provide a work breakdown structure that demonstrates an understanding of the scope and presents the proposed approach to accomplish the requirements of the seed task; including relevant subcontractors; proposed means and methods; plans to mitigate potential problem areas and logistical issues. Include a project organizational chart that lists the core positions (Program Manager, Project Manager, Site Manager, Site Safety, Design QC, Construction QC, Project Engineer(s), and the Designer of Record) and a summary of the qualifications and experience of core personnel and subcontractors. The offeror’s technical approach shall be limited to a maximum of 20 pages.

2. Schedule: The Offeror shall provide a Critical Path Method (CPM) Schedule and a schedule narrative. The schedule shall identify: the award date, submission of bonds, Post Award Kickoff meeting (PAK), and Pre- Construction Meeting, submittals, government review periods, material/equipment delivery, utility outages, all on-site construction broken out by definable features of work, inspection, testing, weather days, other anticipated non-work days, and closeout activities. The narrative shall explain the logic and sequence of events necessary for the successful execution of the project. Submit the schedule on one or more 11x17 sheets, the narrative shall be limited to one 8 ½ x 11 page.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The offeror will be evaluated on the level of understanding of the requirements of the seed task; the technical merit of the proposed means and methods; the identification of potential problem areas and logistical issues, and the technical merit of any such mitigation plans. The offeror will also be evaluated on the experience of the key personnel and subcontractors. The schedule, including the narrative, will be evaluated to determine whether the sequence of the schedule is logical; whether the required activities are provided; whether the duration of the activities are realistic given the offeror’s proposed means and methods and resources to be utilized in accomplishing the work. Schedules that demonstrate completion before the task order period of performance completion date, while adhering to all requirements delineated in the RFP, may be rated higher. The completion date for the seed task order will be based on the duration submitted in the offeror’s schedule.

7.4 Factor 5 - Safety:

(a) Submittal Requirements: Submit Attachment “I” (Safety Data Sheet / Safety Narrative) under

Tab “5.” Individual blocks on this form may be expanded.

The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work and the Offeror’s method for qualifying, evaluating, selecting all tiers of sub-contractors. The narrative shall include:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR); include three previous calendar years’ worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The Offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If there is no EMR premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the element.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates; submit three previous calendar years’ worth of data. If the OSHA DART and TRC rates cannot be submitted, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART and TRC rate data negatively should be addressed as part of this element.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety should describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Fully describe the safety management system that will be used to oversee safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work. Also describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and all subcontractor levels. Additionally, describe the methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.

Note: The narrative shall be limited to two pages. For a partnership or joint venture, the submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Safety narratives for joint ventures may be up to four pages in length.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for its self-performed work and the work of its sub-contractors. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety management system, safety performance record, and the Offeror’s methodology of qualifying, evaluating, selecting and overseeing its subcontractors. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety will include, but are not limited to:

OSHA, NAVFAC’s Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS) database, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The Government will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project and the specific management practices that will be in place for providing deliberate safety program management and mishap prevention support.

Offeror’s Experience Modification Rates (EMR) will be evaluated against the following Navy standards:

Risk EMR Very Low Risk Less than 0.6 Low Risk From 0.6 to less than 0.8 Moderate Risk From 0.8 to 1.0

High Risk Greater than 1.0 to 1.1 Extremely High Risk Greater than 1.1

Offeror’s DART and TRC rates will be evaluated against the following Navy standards:

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

Risk TRC Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49 Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99 Extremely High Risk Greater Than 6.0

7.5 Factor 6 - Price:

The Contracting Officer has determined that certified cost or pricing data is not required to be submitted for this solicitation because the “adequate price competition” exception applies (FAR 15.403-1(b)(1). However, offerors are required to submit other than certified cost or pricing data per the submittal requirements, below.

Offerors are not required to submit a completed Section 00010 (Similar to Section B). Section 00010 represents that total ordering capacity of the contract (shared capacity), not the offeror’s pricing.

Offerors consent to having the maximum labor rates and indirect rates included in the contract award.

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

1. Financial Statements: The offeror shall submit the company financial statement for the most recent completed financial accounting year. The financial statement should include the balance sheet, income statement, statement of cash flows, and notes to the financial statement, if any. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9, and provide an understanding of the offeror’s rate structure.

2. Seed Project Pricing: Offerors shall submit the pricing for the seed task order by entering the total seed task order price (lump sum) in the space provided in attachment J. The offeror will also provide pricing backup with sufficient detail to demonstrates that the labor and indirect rates utilized are no higher than the rates proposed.

3. Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Rates: The offeror will be required to complete the Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Rates (Attachment J). Attachment J includes only key labor categories for the prime contractor, and is not intended to be all inclusive of the labor positions (home or field) that are needed to execute work under this contract.

Attachment J allows for annual escalation of labor rates during the 60 month ordering period and a six month extension of services. The escalated labor rates will be effective on the anniversary date of the contract award.

Instructions for completing attachment J are contained in the attachment itself.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

1. For award of the Multiple Award Construction Contracts, the Government will evaluate proposals by conducting price analysis. The Government will evaluate price based on the total evaluated price in Attachment J. The Government intends to evaluate the extension of services (option) period and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

A. Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation.

B. Comparison of proposed prices to historical prices paid, whether by the Government or other than the Government, for the same or similar services.

C. Comparison of proposed prices with Government cost estimates.

D. Analysis of pricing information provided by the offeror.

The Government will also evaluate the price proposal for unbalanced pricing.

8. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS FOR PHASE II

8.1 The Government will use the tradeoff process for this acquisition.

8.2. Unless discussions are held during Phase One, offerors will not be afforded the opportunity to revise their proposals for Factor 2 – Experience or Factor 3 – Past Performance.

8.3 Factor 2 – Experience, Factor 4 – Technical Solution, and Factor 5 – Safety are of equal importance to one another.